Transportation Research Record 1072 15 Application of Microcomputers 1n Bridge Design RONALD A. LOVE, FURMAN W. BARTON, and WALLACE T. McKEEL, Jr. ABSTRACT The use of microcomputers in bridge design activities in state transportation departments was evaluated through contacts with 32 state agencies. Although pres­ ent use of microcomputers was found to be 1 imi tea, subsequent research showed that the current generation of 16-bit machines offers significant advantages in complementing existing computing facilities in a manner that fully uses the power of both mainframe and microcomputer. The ability of microcomputers to run large bridge design applications in a stand-alone mode was demonstrated by successfully downloading and converting four mainframe programs. Running design and analysis programs in a stand-alone mode frees the mainframe CPU and increases access to software that can be run repetitively without consideration of mainframe costs. When access to larger applications on the mainframe is required, the microcomputer used as an intelligent terminal can process input data locally and send them to the mainframe for processing. Output data, in return, can be downloaded to the microcomputer and reviewed off-line or input into microcomputer applications such as spreadsheets or graphics packages for further processing. Computer applications in engineering design have had preferred alternative for using much of the bridge a dramatic effect on the analysis and design process design software available. In Virginia, as in many in general. Automating analysis and design proce­ other states, many bridge design activities have dures has relegated much of the computational burden been decentralized in district offices across the to machines, allowing the engineer more time to state. The present generation of microcomputers evaluate alternatives and assume a more creative would appear to meet most of the computational needs design and decision-making role. Although the role of these offices. These smaller computers could sup­ computers play may vary from one organization to plement the mainframe, possibly using downloaded, another, their effect has been revolutionary. smaller programs, in a more efficient mode of opera­ The manner in which computers are utilized in the tion. The many advantages of microcomputers, such as design divisions of state departments of transporta­ powerful computing capability, stand-alone capabil­ tion is not standardized and varies greatly. Most of ity, communications capability, and cost-effective­ the software developed for design calculations with­ ness, make them a powerful element in engineering in bridge divisions was designed for implementation computation. on large mainframe computers. Bridge designers, in It is useful and timely to evaluate the manner in large measure, have access to these programs via which microcomputers are used in other states and to terminals, and this has created little demand for suggest the role that they may play in the future. other computer configurations such as microcomput­ Such information could assist bridge engineers and ers. However, recent developments in microcomputer administrators in state departments of transporta­ design have resulted in microcomputers that have tion in making decisions about the use of microcom­ stand-alone capabilities that riv al those of mini­ puters. computers and mainframes and that also possess ver­ The objective of this study was to examine thP. satile communications capability. current and future role of microcomputers in bridge There still appears to be considerable difference design applications within state departments of of opinion about the most appropriate role for transportation. The focus was on the use of micro- microcomputers in bridge design applications. Many computers, as a complement to present computing con­ bridge divisions, which have their own large com­ figurations, to increase productivity and enhance puter and several terminals, find their present con­ cost-effectiveness. figuration satisfactory and see no reason to incur The manner in which bridge engineers currently the additional expense of microcomputers. Other use computers for design and analysis was evaluated bridge engineers, however, are required to use cen­ by contacting a number of state and federal agencies tralized state computer facilities that are some­ including bridge divisions in several states. These times shared by other state agencies. The inconve­ bridge divisions were surveyed to determine their nience of gaining access, the high cost of computing present computer configurations used for bridge and other charges, and excessive turnaround time may design applications and their current and projected not be acceptable. These engineers see the new gen­ uses of microcomputers. The capabilities of the eration of microcomputers as a cost-effective and present generation of 16-bit microcomputers were evaluated for bridge design applications, several microcomputers were used to run typical bridge R.A. Love and F.W. Barton, Department of Civil Engi­ design software, and comparisons of performance were neering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, noted. The feasibility of converting current bridge Va. 22903. W. T. McKeel, Jr., Virginia Highway and design software from mainframes to microcomputers 'l'ransportation Research Council, University of Vir­ was evaluated through actual conversions of existing ginia, Charlottesville, Va. 22903. Current address software. After examination and study of the infor­ for R.A. Love: G.W. Beilfuss and Associates, Inc., mation collected and the tests performed, the poten­ 700 East Butterfield Road, Suite 220, Lombard, Ill. tial for increased usage of microcomputers in bridge 60148. design activities was evaluated. 16 Transportation Research Record 1072 MICROCMPUTER USE IN STATE BRIDGE DIVISIONS were drawn. First, the large majority of states uses mainframe computers in their bridge design and To determine trends in microcomputer use, an infor­ analysis work. A total of 30 out of 32 states, or 94 mal telephone survey of bridge divisions in various percent, use mainframes as their primary computing state departments of transportation was conducted, resource. The two remaining states use minicomputers. and a total of 32 states were contacted: However, in almost all instances, the bridge divi­ sions that use mainframes share them with other state Alabama Massachusetts Pennsylvania agencies under some type of time-sharing arrangement. California Michigan South Carolina Almost all bridge design groups (94 percent) have Colorado Minnesota South Dakota direct access to the computer through terminals Connecticut Mississippi Tennessee located within the design group. In addition, some Delaware Montana Texas states with remote design locations, such as Penn­ Florida Nebraska Vermont sylvania, have terminal access at the district Georgia New Jersey Virginia level. Through terminal access, the engineers are Illinois New York Washington able to run mainframe applications in either inter­ Iowa Nor th Carolina West Virginia active or batch mode, review the results, modify Kentucky Ohio Wisconsin input if desired, and rerun the application. Some Louisiana Oklahoma states, such as Michigan and Delaware, use screen forms packages that simplify data entry at the ter­ Initial contacts were based on prior knowledge of minal by creating the actual input form for a given microcomputer usage in these states; subsequently, program on the terminal screen. Most states with other states involved in microcomputer usage were computer configurations of this type expressed the identified. Additional information on states using belief that it served their computing needs well. Eleven of the 30 states with terminal access to a microcomputers for bridge design-related activities was obtained from FHWA. mainframe or minicomputer indicated that it served their computing needs completely and therefore those The survey consisted of targeting a knowledgeable person within a state bridge division or computer states showed little or no interest in using micro­ division and asking the following questions. computers. However, the majority of the respondents did see 1. What kind of computer system is used for some need for improvement of their computing envi­ bridge design and analysis? ronment. Reasons cited included slow tucnaround time 2. Do your engineers and designers have computer on time-shared systems, a desire for better access access through to software, and insufficient access to terminals a. Direct access via a terminal? connected to the mainframe. Of the 21 states that b. Submitting data using data entry forms indicated a need for improvement in computer access, (data actually entered and program run by 9 including Virginia have begun using microcomputers others)? in bridge design activities, although for the most 3. Do you use microcomputers in bridge design? part specific plans have not been developed (see 4. If not, do you plan to purchase microcomputers Table 1). in the near future for use in bridge design activi­ The manner in which microcomputers are currently ties? used for bridge design purposes varies widely from 5. Do you use your microcomputer as state to state. For example, in Montana, microcom­ a. A stand-alone unit? puters are used almost exclusively for bridge design b. An intelligent terminal linked to a larger and analysis. Design and analysis programs pre­ computer? viously run on IBM minicomputers were converted from